Strictly speaking the Eclipse
Foundation does *not* have a trademark agreement with Oracle. We
have a copyright license, but have no special rights whatsoever to
any of Oracle's trademarks.
In addition to the above, any
specifications which use the javax namespace will continue to
carry the certification and container requirements which Java EE
has had in the past. I.e., implementations which claim
compliance with any version of the Jakarta EE specifications
using the javax namespace must test on and distribute containers
which embed certified Java SE implementations licensed by
Oracle. These restrictions do not apply to Jakarta EE
specifications which do not utilize javax, including future
revisions of the platform specifications which eliminate javax.
This means that any Jakarta EE
*specifications* that contains even a single javax namespace has
Oracle-imposed runtime restrictions that may or may not be good
for the community.
From the point of view of an
implementer, I don't think that there would be any restrictions on
claiming that a single version of Eclipse Jetty supports both
Jakarta EE 8 (using javax) and Jakarta EE 9 (perhaps 100% using
jakarta).
Does that help?
On 2019-05-22 7:18 a.m., Steve Millidge
(Payara) wrote:
Hi
Greg,
I
think this depends on the agreement that has been signed by
the Eclipse Foundation. From a “bare license” and pure fair
use trademark point of view you may be correct. However as
there is a trademark agreement between Eclipse and Oracle
then that is the primary consideration for Eclipse projects.
IANAL
Steve
From: jakartaee-platform-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
<jakartaee-platform-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx>
On Behalf Of Greg Wilkins
Sent: 22 May 2019 12:14
To: jakartaee-platform developer discussions
<jakartaee-platform-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [jakartaee-platform-dev] How to name
implementation of javax.* and jakarta.* APIs?
to start
answering my own question, I do think there is reasonable
fair-use case to say implementation can use the
trademarks:
Of course I'm not a
lawyer.... so I'd still love some feedback from Eclipse
Foundation on this. Note that we already do have some
un released code checked into eclipse repositories that
use the Javax name as a class prefix or partial package
name.
The jetty project is looking at
the naming consequences of the transition with regards
to implementation names (eg module names and
classnames). Let's consider the websocket API. It
will soon be the case that a container may wish to
offer it's webapps the choice of using the javax.*
version of the API or the jakarta.* version.
Would be be allowable (with regards
to trademarks) to have the various modules, classes
and options for those to use javax and jakarta in
their names. For example the user could choose
between enabling modules websocket-javax and
websocket-jakarta, which internally might enable
classes like org.eclipse.jetty.websocket.javax.*
and org.eclipse.jetty.websocket.jakarta.*, which are
configured with parameters etc. that also might
include javax and jakarta?
Or is that going to run foul of one
or more trademarks? Are there fair use provisions
that allows us the use these trademarks in the names
of things that work with the APIs of those trademarks?
If so, are there similar issues
with the use of ee ? Ie could the modules be called
websocket-ee8 and websocket-ee9, which internally
refer to classes
like org.eclipse.jetty.websocket.ee8.*
and org.eclipse.jetty.websocket.ee9.* etc. ? Is
this usage still OK if it is within an non certified
container that does not implement the full ee stack?
Is ee subject to trademarks?
Is this something the Eclipse
Foundation can get legal advice on? Or is the answer
known already?